SUPERCEEDED: Proposed changes to the NAAMA Missile Combat...

[NigelT]

Hello everyone,

This has been a topic of some debate in the past and I sincerely hope it doesn't deteriorate into a flame-war this time around.

I have made some minor adjustments to the NAAMA Missile Combat Rules document and would like feedback on it. If people are generally in agreement it will replace the current rules.

Most of the changes are textual clarifications around what is required for armour and arrows.

I have completely revised and rewritten the section on javelins because I believe the current javelin rules are rubbish. This section is now a work in progress and is only a preliminary draft. I would like to see some testing done around this and would be interested in hearing from people with ideas on how this might work. I would like to explore the options around building javelins more like arrows with a smaller more aerodynamic blunt and no streamers so they can be used from further away, are more useful in battle and look a lot more like javelins for public performance purposes.

I have also changed the way the maximum length for a combat arrow is measured. The old specification (taken from the SCA) was quite fiddly and confusing. Now I am saying that combat arrows should be no longer than 29 inches overall, regardless of what type of blunt you have. This should not change the length in reality but it makes it easier to understand.

I have made numerous other clarifications of wording. Certainly it could use a lot more still, but it's a start.



I would like to use this as a basis for discussion at Eketahuna Hard Camp. Any agreed ideas and changes that come from that discussion will be fed back into this document in conjunction with feedback I get on this forum.


The existing rules can be found here:
http://www.gatheringdarkness.co.nz/forum/download.php?id=175


So, if you have something CONSTRUCTIVE to say, I'm listening.

Nigel

[Robbo]

Out of curiosity, what do the people like the Aussie's and Pom's do for missile rules? Whilst I'm aware that they are there and we are here, could we not start future proofing our battles of the past based on those who have both broader and deeper experiences than ourselves?

Folks are usually happy to say our gear doesn't stack up too well in comparison to those who've at this longer than us...how about our rules/regs specs?

Not picking holes (hey, I've been involved in making some of the rules as we've gone over the years lol), it was just a thought that crossed my mind.

Keep on kicking Nigel, you know I think you do awesome dude.

[Stuart]

I can only speak for what was used in the UK.
Bow poundage varied according to the range involved. If you were shooting blunts across a long battlefield ( like Bosworth Field ) then you made sure you had enough power to reach the target ( 80 yards ) .
Likewise, if you were beseiging a castle. The attackers need more powerful bows to reach up to hit the high battlements, as opposed to the defenders who had gravity on their side when they shot downwards.
The London Battle Group used to train to hit tin dustbins at 70 yards, consistantly.
A lot of emphasis was placed on teaching good safe shooting. All shots were to the shield ( long or medium range ) or armoured legs ( at close range ). Any archer who made a habit of shooting to any warrior`s head faced instant justice. His bow was broken in front of him and he was dismissed from the battlefield.
Accuracy was high. The old London Battle Group used to train to hit tin dustbins at 70 yards, consistantly.
For standard display battles, Longbows were usual, and were about 30 - 40 pound draw max. Arrow length was what you could comfortably draw.
Women tended to use 28 inch arrows, men found that 30-32 inch suited a longer draw. All arrow shafts were oiled ( linseed) and not taped. The highest quality wood shafts were used and some reenactors applied soft wax as an alternative to linseed oil. We were taught that only dry shafts split. We lost very few arrows per season.
All archers were trained to accept incoming fire, track incoming arrows and sidestep so they missed. Or you stood your ground and dropped your helm and looked down. Before any archer took to the field, he/she was given a shield and shot at. If nothing else, it showed the value of " arrow awarness" and good shield technique. Watch the movie "Faintheart, and you can see Britannia Group doing just this to a new recruit ( extras section of the DVD ) .
All infantry were trained to do the same.
Battles were very different to NZ, even though we fielded about the same numbers in the majority of shows.
In a UK battle, both sides had archers and part of the archery tactics was to offer effective supressive fire against the opposing archers, so your own infantry could get on with the real fighting.
Kim Siddorn`s group had different equipment standards to say, Britannia`s ( Gladiator etc ).
We did not see many crossbows. At the time I left the UK , there were no Hungarian recurves.

Hope this is of interest to someone.

[NigelT]

Robbo - yes, you're quite right. It is well worth looking at what other people are doing, even if this means we cherry pick the bits that we can make work.

Stuart - thanks for that. That was actually very concise and informative. Everything you've said makes a lot of sense in it's context. Although I can't see many people in NZ letting you walk off a battlefield alive if you were to deliberately snap their bow in front of them... that might need some work. There are other elements in there which just don't exist in New Zealand, but again, it's worth looking at for ideas on how we can improve. Thank you for that.

Further to Robbos comment - is there anyone here who's had experience with what the Aussies do?

Perhaps an SCA perspective as well?

Nigel

[Angel]

A good portion of the combat archery in Australia is, I'm presuming through my limited experience there, done by the SCA, who got their combat archery rules (which are _entirely_ different to the SCA combat archery rules in the States) from the metal weapons groups, primarily the New Varangian Guard, if I remember correctly.

Current SCA Kingdom of Lochac - pronounced Lock-arc if you're wondering (Aus & NZ) armour & gear specifications can be found here - http://www.sca.org.au/marshal/docs/fighters-handbook.pdf

The armour requirements have increased over time, to bring the archers up to the same level as the heavy combatants, in case they are accidentally struck by a blow.

Most archers are not heavy combatants, they may not be struck with any weapon, though they can be killed with arrows, and are declared dead by a heavy combatant within 5m who could easily have engaged them in combat, if he was able. Ie, they have a clear undefended run up to you, and say something like "Archer, you are dead" .

Some archers are also heavy combatants who can engage in normal melee combat as well, they don't wear the plumes that designate a non-contact participant.

Because of the armour standards, low-poundage bows (30lb@28" max), and well-tested blunt tips, arrows can be fired, unannounced, directly at your opponent from a minimum range of just 5 metres, without any more regard for targeting beyond trying to get bits which actually count as a kill. A lot like paintball really.

Helmets, especially face plates, are a favourite target, as your opponent is most likely to acknowledge the hit, and many people prefer to be hit somewhere covered in steel, rather than cloth.

With the numbers of archers on the war field, archers are generally sniping at targets of opportunity, rather than letting off volleys, and are often remarkably effective at opening up a shield wall by taking out the pikemen, or taking out someone in the middle who peeked over their shield at the wrong time.

We ran some scenarios recently that involved unarmoured archers from the sidelines firing into the melees, usually representing the English, doing volleys as they had the numbers - it was good to involve people who wouldn't normally take part in combat - audience participation. They weren't allowed to be targeted at all of course.

[griff]

http://nvg.org.au/documents/combat_safety.pdf

[NigelT]

Hi everyone,

Thanks for your excellent feedback on this. I'm going to lock this thread now and start a new one - I've received heaps of feedback and I'd like to avoid confusion by re-posting the new proposed changes by themselves instead in in addendum to the last ones I posted.

Those who missed out on providing feedback will still have the opportunity to comment before anything gets made final. Watch this space.

Cheers,
Nigel